Refine
Document Type
- Article (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Systematic review (4) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (4) (remove)
Highlights
• Hyperglycaemia, in rodents, is consistently associated with cognitive impairments.
• The strength of this association is supported by the heterogeneity of the studies.
• The study of the role of insulin on cognition is mainly limited to spatial memory.
• Preclinical studies on the role of insulin signalling on cognition are male biased.
Abstract
Beside its involvement in somatic dysfunctions, altered insulin signalling constitutes a risk factor for the development of mental disorders like Alzheimer’s disease and obsessive-compulsive disorder. While insulin-related somatic and mental disorders are often comorbid, the fundamental mechanisms underlying this association are still elusive. Studies conducted in rodent models appear well suited to help decipher these mechanisms. Specifically, these models are apt to prospective studies in which causative mechanisms can be manipulated via multiple tools (e.g., genetically engineered models and environmental interventions), and experimentally dissociated to control for potential confounding factors. Here, we provide a narrative synthesis of preclinical studies investigating the association between hyperglycaemia – as a proxy of insulin-related metabolic dysfunctions – and impairments in working and spatial memory, and attention. Ultimately, this review will advance our knowledge on the role of glucose metabolism in the comorbidity between somatic and mental illnesses.
Beside its involvement in somatic dysfunctions, altered insulin signalling constitutes a risk factor for the development of mental disorders like Alzheimer’s disease and obsessive-compulsive disorder. While insulin-related somatic and mental disorders are often comorbid, the fundamental mechanisms underlying this association are still elusive. Studies conducted in rodent models appear well suited to help decipher these mechanisms. Specifically, these models are apt to prospective studies in which causative mechanisms can be manipulated via multiple tools (e.g., genetically engineered models and environmental interventions), and experimentally dissociated to control for potential confounding factors. Here, we provide a narrative synthesis of preclinical studies investigating the association between hyperglycaemia – as a proxy of insulin-related metabolic dysfunctions – and impairments in working and spatial memory, and attention. Ultimately, this review will advance our knowledge on the role of glucose metabolism in the comorbidity between somatic and mental illnesses.
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical or surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.
Material and methods: Prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies comparing alternative or adjunctive measures, and reporting on changes in bleeding scores (i.e., bleed0ing index (BI) or bleeding on probing (BOP)), probing depth (PD) values or suppuration (SUPP) were searched.
Results: Peri-implant mucositis: adjunctive use of local antiseptics lead to greater PD reduction (weighted mean difference (WMD) = − 0.23 mm; p = 0.03, respectively), whereas changes in BOP were comparable (WMD = − 5.30%; p = 0.29). Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: alternative measures for biofilm removal and systemic antibiotics yielded higher BOP reduction (WMD = − 28.09%; p = 0.01 and WMD = − 17.35%; p = 0.01, respectively). Surgical non-reconstructive peri-implantitis treatment: WMD in PD amounted to − 1.11 mm favoring adjunctive implantoplasty (p = 0.02). Adjunctive reconstructive measures lead to significantly higher radiographic bone defect fill/reduction (WMD = 56.46%; p = 0.01 and WMD = − 1.47 mm; p = 0.01), PD (− 0.51 mm; p = 0.01) and lower soft-tissue recession (WMD = − 0.63 mm; p = 0.01), while changes in BOP were not significant (WMD = − 11.11%; p = 0.11).
Conclusions: Alternative and adjunctive measures provided no beneficial effect in resolving peri-implant mucositis, while alternative measures were superior in reducing BOP values following non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. Adjunctive reconstructive measures were beneficial regarding radiographic bone-defect fill/reduction, PD reduction and lower soft-tissue recession, although they did not improve the resolution of mucosal inflammation.
Background: Erythema migrans represents an early cutaneous and most common manifestation of Lyme borreliosis. Recommendations regarding pharmacological agents, dose and duration of treatment are subject of intense debate. This review aims to explore differences in efficacy and safety between pharmacological treatments and control treatment.
Methods: To identify relevant studies, we will conduct a systematic literature search. We will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs. Eligible comparative studies need to (1) consider patients with a diagnosis of erythema migrans resulting from Lyme borreliosis and (2) compare different pharmacological agents against each other, against any other non-pharmacological treatment, placebo or no treatment. Two review authors will independently assess included studies for risk of bias according to the methods of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and related to specific study designs. We will address patient-relevant outcomes including clinical remission of cutaneous symptoms, any treatment-related adverse events, quality of life and progressive symptoms such as neuroborreliosis or Lyme carditis and flu-like symptoms. Provided that the identified trials are comparable in terms of clinical issues, combined estimates will be provided. Estimations of treatment effects will be calculated based on a random effects model. Heterogeneity will be evaluated based on I (2) and chi-square test. In case of significant heterogeneity, a pooled estimate will not be provided, but heterogeneity will be investigated on the basis of methodological and clinical study aspects. We plan subgroup analysis to reveal potential differences in the effect estimates between patient populations and treatment specifications. We will consider risk of bias using sensitivity analyses to decide whether to rely on the pooled estimates. The quality of a body of evidence for individual outcomes will be assessed using the GRADE approach.
Discussion: Benefits and harms of pharmacological treatment in erythema migrans have not yet been adequately assessed. This systematic review will evaluate and summarise available evidence addressing benefits and harms of different pharmacological treatments. In addition, this summary of clinical evidence will inform decision-making between clinicians and patients and will play an important part in patient care.
Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: CRD42016037932.